Theos-Talk Archives (October 2006 Message tt00074)

Mark, Daniel, Friends, 

If it would be OK to make undefined compilations "from a number of sources" and call them Letters, everything would get confused.

I am sure Daniel doesn't want to get things confused, though. 

John Algeo's work as an "editor"  is more than enough in that respect.  

What's the use of getting bits and pieces here and there and then call the resulting text  a "Letter"? Especially call it a letter from an Adept? 

What's the need or purpose of it?  I don't think Daniel needs to look like being a scholar by mixing texts from here and there, as Algeo did with the  HPB Letters -- a terrible mess he did,  in some cases. 


Regards,   Carlos. 



De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Cópia:

Data:Fri, 6 Oct 2006 06:10:16 -0700 (PDT)

Assunto:Theos-World Re Dan's Pretty Mahatma

> Re Dan's Pretty Mahatma
> 
> Well, as usual, Dan ignores comments 
> made in criticism to the pseudo- concentration
> -"letter" and finds ONE among them he 
> thinks he can disclaim. (Note: there 
> is no "concentration-letter," but only 
> his compilation from various sources which 
> he _calls_ a letter!) If Blavatsky even 
> thought about it, she may have thought 
> the supposed letter refered to by ver 
> Planck was something of Sinnett's bonafide 
> letters (can anyone remember the contents 
> of All those letters?) One can use logic 
> to uphold or defeat any fact or circumstance, 
> genuinely or not. I'll use your quote:
> 
> 
> W.Q. Judge, Madame Blavatsky wrote:
> 
> "....I say — Blessed are the pure 
> hearted who have only intuition for 
> intuition is better than intellect...."
> 
> Blavatsky says somewhere that many 
> of the most "logical" and respected 
> of scientists are actually soul-less, 
> they only have their Brain, and not 
> the higher principles. One might 
> wonder about that in considering some 
> theosophical historians also.
> 
> I say, by all means, if you think 
> meditating on a guru's image is the 
> right thing to do, then by all means 
> do what you want! (I recommend you 
> visualize a big strong one, with long 
> hair and pearly white teeth.) My own 
> thought is that after a certain point 
> the Teachers say: "Well, they must 
> develop their own discrimination, if 
> they have none and think such hogwash 
> is truth - then Let them! If they 
> can't develop their own intuition and 
> depend upon themselves, then that is 
> all the further they can go, for now."
> 
> From the same letter you quote HPB:
> 
> <...You know that S.R. [Subba Row] 
> claimed for the two past years to be
> in communication with my Master....!!!..." 
> 
> 'And she implied that they were 
> phoney communications. 'And I ask 
> you that if Subba Row could fall, and 
> be getting phoney communications, 
> couldn't this also happen to Judge? 
> NO ONE operating publicly at the level 
> of Subba Row or Judge can avoid eventually 
> being corrupted, which is why the school 
> is not public. (And HPB had extra-special 
> help, even not leaving her apartment 
> for 6 mos.) Does this mean that one 
> rejects all Subba Row's and Judge's 
> writings? - of course not. (And I think 
> Judge didn't get corrupted and confused, 
> but everyone around him did.) (The 
> type of confusion that dan creates.) 
> It is probably a phenomena that HPB 
> could keep up with as much as she did, 
> and you can't ascribe omniscence to 
> her to see what was going on everywhere. 
> (One wonder's if the purpose of all 
> this is to create doubt in Judge...)
> 
> On another of dan's quotes (which 
> he _doesn't_ provide the reference for) 
> he has HPB saying:
> 
> 
> nothing about the number of messages 
> you may have received from Masters through 
> Judge, whom I would never believe capable 
> of it, or any one else. Once Mahatma K. H. 
> and my Master say they did not emanate 
> from them, I am bound to believe what 
> they say; and therefore must suppose 
> such messages either tricks made by chelas 
> or pure frauds..."> ((Or Coues Lies....))
> 
> So is HPB saying there that even 
> Judge was deluded about getting 
> communications? (no reference) 
> 
> I have to look up that Key to Theosophy
> quote DC used yet.
> 
> While Blavatsky says that in her 
> school meditation begins with the pituary, 
> and that "Our chakras are all in the head..." 
> - which doesn't agree with visualizing a 
> personal guru in the heart... Another 
> contradiction with this against personal-guru 
> worship is the teacher's statement:
> 
> "....learn to be loyal to the Idea, 
> rather than to my poor self..." (MLs pp. 
> 323-24, TUP)
> 
> Is this consistent with visualizing 
> a teacher's "poor self" in meditation?
> 
> Also, since no one else is compiling 
> all this information (for what ultimate 
> motivations, one wonders sometimes), and 
> discussions are usually based on quotes 
> dan makes - I'm realizing that it is 
> not wise to depend upon dan's quotations, 
> as I know at least one incidence (which 
> I could look up), and have others to 
> look up, - where he is inconsistent. 
> He said at first that the concentration-
> "letter" was referred to in the Path 
> "'87, '88, & '89" - then changed it to 
> "'88, '89...", - and then again changed 
> it to only "'89, '90,..." What happened 
> to the disappearing references? I don't 
> trust dan's references any more. And I, 
> as well as most others, don't care enough 
> or think important enough to do the 
> research on all these miscroscopic points. 
> (Whats the real motivation behind this, 
> except to create doubt and confusion, 
> which can be done on ANY point given 
> the effort....)
> 
> Does it occur to anyone that dan 
> is effectively Destroying the theosophical 
> history reference base - through the 
> back door, so to speak. Through his 
> accumulation of all this huge amount of 
> material he has, in HIS copyrighted version 
> - other people don't accumulate it themselves. 
> 'So one has to rely on his Copyrighted 
> version on line. Then on top of it - his 
> "Esoteric World of Madame B." - a huge 
> amount of material - CANNOT BE USED OR 
> QUOTED BY ANYONE! - because he has 
> Silently Edited it, (not indicating what 
> is edited out with elision....) - and 
> who would trust and use this for quotes
> .... Nobody! I only have one question 
> now - dan.... who is your "mini me" for 
> your "Dr. Evil"?
> 
> I thought that was an excellent 
> response by Rodolpho Don on Raul's inquiry!
> 
> Very interesting article sent in 
> by Cass on all the popes.
> 
> Back to philosophy and away from 
> this crappola!
> - jake j.
> ---------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra.
> Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite
> http://mail.terra.com.br/protected_email/imail/imail.cgi?+_u=carlosaveline&_l=1,1160140328.116747.13960.curepipe.hst.terra.com.br,9553,Des15,Des15
> 
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 05/10/2006 / Versão: 4.4.00/4867
> Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/
> 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]